US President Barack Obama quietly signed his name to an Executive Order on Friday, allowing the White House to control all private communications in the country in the name of national security.

President Obama released his latest Executive Order on Friday, July 6, a 2,205-word statement offered as the “Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions.” And although the president chose not to commemorate the signing with much fanfare, the powers he provides to himself and the federal government under the latest order are among the most far-reaching yet of any of his executive decisions.

“The Federal Government must have the ability to communicate at all times and under all circumstances to carry out its most critical and time sensitive missions,” the president begins the order. “Survivable, resilient, enduring and effective communications, both domestic and international, are essential to enable the executive branch to communicate within itself and with: the legislative and judicial branches; State, local, territorial and tribal governments; private sector entities; and the public, allies and other nations.”

President Obama adds that it is necessary for the government to be able to reach anyone in the country during situations it considers critical, writing, “Such communications must be possible under all circumstances to ensure national security, effectively manage emergencies and improve national resilience.” Later the president explains that such could be done by establishing a “joint industry-Government center that is capable of assisting in the initiation, coordination, restoration and reconstitution of NS/EP [national security and emergency preparedness] communications services or facilities under all conditions of emerging threats, crisis or emergency.”

“The views of all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and the public must inform the development of NS/EP communications policies, programs and capabilities,” he adds.

On the government’s official website for the National Communications Systems, the government explains that that “infrastructure includes wireline, wireless, satellite, cable, and broadcasting, and provides the transport networks that support the Internet and other key information systems,” suggesting that the president has indeed effectively just allowed himself to control the country’s Internet access.

In order to allow the White House to reach anyone within the US, the president has put forth a plan to establish a high-level committee calling from agents with the Department of Homeland Security, Pentagon, Federal Communications Commission and other government divisions to ensure that his new executive order can be implemented.In explaining the order, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) writes that the president has authorized the DHS "the authority to seize private facilities when necessary, effectively shutting down or limiting civilian communications."

In Section 5 of his order, President Obama outlines the specific department and agency responsibilities that will see through his demands. In a few paragraphs, President Obama explains that Executive Committee that will oversee his order must be supplied with “the technical support necessary to develop and maintain plans adequate to provide for the security and protection of NS/EP communications,” and that that same body will be in tasked with dispatching that communiqué “to the Federal Government and State, local, territorial and trial governments,” by means of “commercial, Government and privately owned communications resources.”

Later, the president announces that the Department of Homeland Security will be tasked with drafting a plan during the next 60 days to explain how the DHS will command the government’s Emergency Telecommunications Service, as well as other telecom conduits. In order to be able to spread the White House’s message across the country, President Obama also asks for the purchasing of equipment and services that will enable such.

_________________Acts 4:13, 1 Cor. 2:1-5, Rom. 12:1-2

July 13th, 2012, 11:21 am

Pablo

RIP Killer

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 amPosts: 10022Location: Dallas

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

first, I unbolded this article - was a little tough to read?

second, I added paragraph breaks?

third, didn't GWB have some pretty strong ability to monitor communications in the name of national security as well?

You were talking the Patriot Act, and that I believe was specifically for certain areas or potentially problematic groups. It became a scream of racial profiling for a while I think too. But I don't recall too many blue eyed blonde, terrorists bording the planes in Boston.

Having said that, this seems to be a much larger over reach on the part of the WH, especially when they've proven to be the least transparent, most uncooperative, and least ethical administration we've had since Nixon. The total lack of integrity is astounding!

As I've said before, Obama has more lies than a Turkish rug store.

_________________Acts 4:13, 1 Cor. 2:1-5, Rom. 12:1-2

July 13th, 2012, 11:33 am

Pablo

RIP Killer

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 amPosts: 10022Location: Dallas

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

WarEr4Christ wrote:

You were talking the Patriot Act, and that I believe was specifically for certain areas or potentially problematic groups. It became a scream of racial profiling for a while I think too. But I don't recall too many blue eyed blonde, terrorists bording the planes in Boston.

Having said that, this seems to be a much larger over reach on the part of the WH, especially when they've proven to be the least transparent, most uncooperative, and least ethical administration we've had since Nixon. The total lack of integrity is astounding!

As I've said before, Obama has more lies than a Turkish rug store.

While I don't disagree, I think you are seeing this through your elephant tinted Republican glasses and if you don't think all presidents lie you are sadly mistaken.

The Patriot Act not only covered communications but financial transactions as well. It also redefined terrorism to include domestic acts (which allowed the gov't to detain immigrants indefinately). Obama extended a number of key provisions in that Act last year.

I'll have to look through this specific act, but I'm not sure it is all that far reaching above what the Patriot Act looked to accomplish. I believe if Bush had passed this you wouldn't have much of an issue with it, I could be wrong however.

You may or may not know this but when you sign up for the military you swear allegiance to "Defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic." By that definition the Military should absolutely be involved with flushing the WH. The continued side stepping and circumventing the Constitution, and now with the SC decision, they've violated the will of the people and our rights.

By no means am I suggesting that we have a 1776 all over again, but the military is duty bound to disobey the authority of someone from the very top who is attacking the Constituion at it's core. We the People have one chance left, and that's November, if that fails, we're DONE!

_________________Acts 4:13, 1 Cor. 2:1-5, Rom. 12:1-2

July 13th, 2012, 12:28 pm

WarEr4Christ

QB Coach - Brian Callahan

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pmPosts: 3056Location: Elkhart, In.

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

Oh and they are Conservative glasses not Republican. It just so happens that the Rep. lean more Conservative than the communists on the left.

I wonder if most of you fellas were too young to remember the lines outside of Russain grocery stores. Monday was bread day, stale govenrment issued, same for everybody, bread. Tuesday was meat for those that were lucky enough to get it, and so on. The only ones that didn't have that issue lived and worked in the Kremlin. The authorities had the goods, and the populace had the hunger and shortages.

I guess we would need to ask the Native Americans how well they've been provided for during the 100 plus years that the government has paid their housing, food, health care, and so on.

_________________Acts 4:13, 1 Cor. 2:1-5, Rom. 12:1-2

July 13th, 2012, 12:32 pm

WarEr4Christ

QB Coach - Brian Callahan

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pmPosts: 3056Location: Elkhart, In.

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

And now we hear that President Obama just signed an Executive Order yesterday that eliminates the requirements for the "work" portion of the TANF program.

So the program that was negotiated and instituted into law under Clinton that reduced the work load on the Welfare Admin. by half in the first 4 years, and severly diminished the number of children living under extreme poverty by requiring the parents to stop breeding because their no monetary value per child born, and the parents HAVE to work in order to receive the benefits, can now get paid for yes you heard it here, SLEEPING.

Welcome to the age of entitlement folks, everything will be government issued, and substandard, unless you're in the leadership crowd.

_________________Acts 4:13, 1 Cor. 2:1-5, Rom. 12:1-2

July 13th, 2012, 6:18 pm

I.E.

Walk On

Joined: September 11th, 2010, 10:19 pmPosts: 408

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

This is retarded.

The Patriot Act legalized the monitoring of the central switches of all the nations communications carriers (land line and mobile), plus extensive internet and transaction monitoring. Note that I said "legalized" - because GWB was ALREADY doing it, as a result of the government's reactionary response to 9-11.

END of story. President Obama has elected to continue several of GWB's policies that are highly suspect impositions on our freedoms - but anyone who blames Obama about it and not GWB is dumb or a liar - or both.

This particular capability - for the government to control communications in the event of a national emergency - is nothing new. And it is particularly important, in this environment where our technology might be used against us. BUT... this is not some willy-nilly power that any President can just enact arbitrarily. This is not a dictatorship - and never will be.

July 17th, 2012, 8:56 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10408Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

I.E. wrote:

This is retarded.

The Patriot Act legalized the monitoring of the central switches of all the nations communications carriers (land line and mobile), plus extensive internet and transaction monitoring. Note that I said "legalized" - because GWB was ALREADY doing it, as a result of the government's reactionary response to 9-11.

END of story. President Obama has elected to continue several of GWB's policies that are highly suspect impositions on our freedoms - but anyone who blames Obama about it and not GWB is dumb or a liar - or both.

This particular capability - for the government to control communications in the event of a national emergency - is nothing new. And it is particularly important, in this environment where our technology might be used against us. BUT... this is not some willy-nilly power that any President can just enact arbitrarily. This is not a dictatorship - and never will be.

So should we applaud Obama for continuing those policies, even if they are wrong? Even if he used them as a means of campainging for the presidency and saying he didn't believe in doing it? Obama has done everything he said he wouldn't do during this campaign speeches. He has broken more promises than I can count....or care to try. I know, I know...every candidate has. But this guy has gone well beyond the norm.

And be careful of the word "never". Every dictatorship in the history of the world took place in a country where people felt it could "never" happen to them. You think Germany elected Hitler as their "dictator"? Think again.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

July 18th, 2012, 9:28 am

I.E.

Walk On

Joined: September 11th, 2010, 10:19 pmPosts: 408

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

m2karateman wrote:

I.E. wrote:

This is retarded.

The Patriot Act legalized the monitoring of the central switches of all the nations communications carriers (land line and mobile), plus extensive internet and transaction monitoring. Note that I said "legalized" - because GWB was ALREADY doing it, as a result of the government's reactionary response to 9-11.

END of story. President Obama has elected to continue several of GWB's policies that are highly suspect impositions on our freedoms - but anyone who blames Obama about it and not GWB is dumb or a liar - or both.

This particular capability - for the government to control communications in the event of a national emergency - is nothing new. And it is particularly important, in this environment where our technology might be used against us. BUT... this is not some willy-nilly power that any President can just enact arbitrarily. This is not a dictatorship - and never will be.

So should we applaud Obama for continuing those policies, even if they are wrong? Even if he used them as a means of campainging for the presidency and saying he didn't believe in doing it? Obama has done everything he said he wouldn't do during this campaign speeches. He has broken more promises than I can count....or care to try. I know, I know...every candidate has. But this guy has gone well beyond the norm.

And be careful of the word "never". Every dictatorship in the history of the world took place in a country where people felt it could "never" happen to them. You think Germany elected Hitler as their "dictator"? Think again.

My answer is No - we should not applaud Obama for continuing the Patriot Act crap, extending the wars, or Guantanamo. In addition to that, I really have problems with the lack of indictments and justice in the financial world over the housing and banking debacles. Bottom line: I voted for him, and there are PLENTY of reasons I'd like another guy to step in for the next 4 years. But the answer is not from the Republican Party - are you kidding me? That's Krazy-Town religious whackos, neocon warmongers, racists, economically ignorant austerity proponents... sorry - there's no answer there. So yes - I'll take my flawed Pres over the alternative. How's that for honest?

July 18th, 2012, 10:44 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10408Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

I.E. wrote:

m2karateman wrote:

I.E. wrote:

This is retarded.

The Patriot Act legalized the monitoring of the central switches of all the nations communications carriers (land line and mobile), plus extensive internet and transaction monitoring. Note that I said "legalized" - because GWB was ALREADY doing it, as a result of the government's reactionary response to 9-11.

END of story. President Obama has elected to continue several of GWB's policies that are highly suspect impositions on our freedoms - but anyone who blames Obama about it and not GWB is dumb or a liar - or both.

This particular capability - for the government to control communications in the event of a national emergency - is nothing new. And it is particularly important, in this environment where our technology might be used against us. BUT... this is not some willy-nilly power that any President can just enact arbitrarily. This is not a dictatorship - and never will be.

So should we applaud Obama for continuing those policies, even if they are wrong? Even if he used them as a means of campainging for the presidency and saying he didn't believe in doing it? Obama has done everything he said he wouldn't do during this campaign speeches. He has broken more promises than I can count....or care to try. I know, I know...every candidate has. But this guy has gone well beyond the norm.

And be careful of the word "never". Every dictatorship in the history of the world took place in a country where people felt it could "never" happen to them. You think Germany elected Hitler as their "dictator"? Think again.

My answer is No - we should not applaud Obama for continuing the Patriot Act crap, extending the wars, or Guantanamo. In addition to that, I really have problems with the lack of indictments and justice in the financial world over the housing and banking debacles. Bottom line: I voted for him, and there are PLENTY of reasons I'd like another guy to step in for the next 4 years. But the answer is not from the Republican Party - are you kidding me? That's Krazy-Town religious whackos, neocon warmongers, racists, economically ignorant austerity proponents... sorry - there's no answer there. So yes - I'll take my flawed Pres over the alternative. How's that for honest?

You're entitled to your opinion. But religious wacko? What Republican president in recent memory has brought religion into the discussion when making a decision? Warmonger? Democratic presidents have gone to war more than Republicans throughout history. Racist? Look at Obama's chosen cabinetry and tell me who is the racist. He's got criminals galore, including his Attorney General. And what color are they? Economically ignorant? REALLY? You want to go there?! Since when does spending recklessly pull you out of an economic slump? Since when does dividing money create wealth? How is spending trillions on an extremely flawed HealthCare Act make economic sense for this country?

The alternative is getting someone in office who hasn't tripped over his own ego for four years, and brought down the country in the process.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

July 19th, 2012, 9:54 am

regularjoe12

Def. Coordinator – Teryl Austin

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 amPosts: 4211Location: Davison Mi

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

Quote:

But religious wacko? What Republican president in recent memory has brought religion into the discussion when making a decision? Warmonger?

You dont have to go back that far....G.W. While he didnt push Religeon TOO hard...the guy was a wacko and claimed that god helped him be "The Decider".

Bush was a joke......obama is no better and in some cases worse..in other better. I want a 3rd option please.

_________________2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion

July 19th, 2012, 1:23 pm

njroar

Team MVP

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 3262

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

I.E. wrote:

m2karateman wrote:

I.E. wrote:

This is retarded.

The Patriot Act legalized the monitoring of the central switches of all the nations communications carriers (land line and mobile), plus extensive internet and transaction monitoring. Note that I said "legalized" - because GWB was ALREADY doing it, as a result of the government's reactionary response to 9-11.

END of story. President Obama has elected to continue several of GWB's policies that are highly suspect impositions on our freedoms - but anyone who blames Obama about it and not GWB is dumb or a liar - or both.

This particular capability - for the government to control communications in the event of a national emergency - is nothing new. And it is particularly important, in this environment where our technology might be used against us. BUT... this is not some willy-nilly power that any President can just enact arbitrarily. This is not a dictatorship - and never will be.

So should we applaud Obama for continuing those policies, even if they are wrong? Even if he used them as a means of campainging for the presidency and saying he didn't believe in doing it? Obama has done everything he said he wouldn't do during this campaign speeches. He has broken more promises than I can count....or care to try. I know, I know...every candidate has. But this guy has gone well beyond the norm.

And be careful of the word "never". Every dictatorship in the history of the world took place in a country where people felt it could "never" happen to them. You think Germany elected Hitler as their "dictator"? Think again.

My answer is No - we should not applaud Obama for continuing the Patriot Act crap, extending the wars, or Guantanamo. In addition to that, I really have problems with the lack of indictments and justice in the financial world over the housing and banking debacles. Bottom line: I voted for him, and there are PLENTY of reasons I'd like another guy to step in for the next 4 years. But the answer is not from the Republican Party - are you kidding me? That's Krazy-Town religious whackos, neocon warmongers, racists, economically ignorant austerity proponents... sorry - there's no answer there. So yes - I'll take my flawed Pres over the alternative. How's that for honest?

He's not going to indict people he gave positions too. Geitner oversaw everything as the head of the Treasury in NY. Just look through his appointments and you'll find plenty that were at the heart of the problem with prominent positions in his administration.

July 19th, 2012, 1:25 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10408Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

regularjoe12 wrote:

Quote:

But religious wacko? What Republican president in recent memory has brought religion into the discussion when making a decision? Warmonger?

You dont have to go back that far....G.W. While he didnt push Religeon TOO hard...the guy was a wacko and claimed that god helped him be "The Decider".

Bush was a joke......obama is no better and in some cases worse..in other better. I want a 3rd option please.

And if you believe in God, then you receive his help. You think Obama views things differently? What I'm saying is that GWB never said "I won't allow that because it's against my religion", or "it's not God's will" or anything like that. He didn't push his religious beliefs on the country by way of legislation.

I am not a big fan of GWB and his time in office. But in eight years he hasn't done NEARLY as much damage to this country as Obama has done in less than four. Not. Even. Close.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

July 19th, 2012, 3:28 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Welcome to Government Controlled Censorship fellas

m2karateman wrote:

regularjoe12 wrote:

Quote:

But religious wacko? What Republican president in recent memory has brought religion into the discussion when making a decision? Warmonger?

You dont have to go back that far....G.W. While he didnt push Religeon TOO hard...the guy was a wacko and claimed that god helped him be "The Decider".

Bush was a joke......obama is no better and in some cases worse..in other better. I want a 3rd option please.

And if you believe in God, then you receive his help. You think Obama views things differently? What I'm saying is that GWB never said "I won't allow that because it's against my religion", or "it's not God's will" or anything like that. He didn't push his religious beliefs on the country by way of legislation.

I am not a big fan of GWB and his time in office. But in eight years he hasn't done NEARLY as much damage to this country as Obama has done in less than four. Not. Even. Close.

I agree. Like I've said, Bush's worst decision was to invade Iraq. Right or wrong it cost us a ton and it gave the Democrats the ability to say "see, Republicans spend like drunken sailors too!!!"

But wars end, these BS social entitlement programs don't, period. All they do is grow and continue to cause more and more harm to the country. We can't even afford the ones we currently have, and we just passed the biggest one in history... Great job!!!